- From: Gérard Talbot <www-style@gtalbot.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:10:54 -0500
- To: Greg Whitworth <gwhit@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Francois Remy <frremy@microsoft.com>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
Le 2016-03-07 23:56, Greg Whitworth a écrit : >> - - - - - >> >> " >> table-row-group (In HTML: TBODY) >> Specifies that an element groups one or more rows. >> " >> 2.1. Table Structure >> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/#table-structure >> >> This would have to be changed (and should be changed) into: >> >> Specifies that an element groups zero or more rows. >> >> HTML4 said 1 or more. <!ELEMENT TBODY O O (TR)+ -- table body --> means start tag is Optional, end tag is Optional and that at least one table row is required. https://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html#edef-TBODY >> HTML5 says 0 or more. " The table, thead, tbody, tfoot, tr, ol, ul and dl elements are allowed to be empty in HTML. " Differences from HTML4 Living Document — Last Updated 13 April 2015 4 Content Model https://html-differences.whatwg.org/#content-model " Content model: Zero or more tr (...) " 4 The elements of HTML 4.9 Tabular data 4.9.5 The tbody element https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/tables.html#the-tbody-element >> >> Search for "Chris Rebert" and "empty <tbody>" for this. >> >> [CSS21][CSS22][css-tables][css3-tables] Table sanity/regression >> testcase >> needs review http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www- >> style/2015Jul/0392.html > > Thanks!! I've added an issue inline for this one so I can just do a > quick double check of the specs and then swap it out and opened an > issue: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/issues-ed-20160202.html > >> - - - - - >> 2.4. Spanning >> We should define how spanning works. >> https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/#spanning >> >> Quick rowspanning test (with minimal code): >> http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/css21testsuite/rowspanning- >> cell-challenge-001.html >> >> Expected result (approximate table layout): >> >> +-----------+-----------+ >> | |C | >> |A +-----------+ >> | | | >> | |D | >> +-----------+ | >> |B | | >> +-----------+-----------+ >> >> >> Actual result (approximate table layout) in many browsers (Firefox 44, >> Opera >> 12.16, IE11) (don't know about Edge14) >> >> +-----------+-----------+ >> | | | >> |A |C | >> | | | >> +-----------------------+ >> | | | >> |B |D | >> | | | >> +-----------------------+ >> >> Whether 'table-layout: fixed' is declared or not makes no difference. >> > > Not sure what you're point is here (sorry if I missed it), My main point is: Chrome 49 is the only browser that renders the rowspanning-cell-challenge-001.html as expected. That test has minimal CSS code and minimal HTML table elements. And declaring 'table-layout: fixed' or not declaring 'table-layout: fixed' in that test is irrelevant since 'table-layout: fixed' only has a predictable impact on the horizontal formatting of a table element. > besides > that we need to define and agree how spanning, and subsequently the > width/height calculations should be done in regards to spanning. That's it. - - - - - - 3.4.3 The Caption-Side property https://drafts.csswg.org/css-tables-3/#caption-side-property Firefox also supports 'top-outside' and 'bottom-outside' values for caption-side: http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/CSS3WritingModes/CaptionSide-writing-modes-dhtml.html Gérard
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2016 20:11:25 UTC